No doubt you have already heard about this situation:

[hfcougar]

I have written about this publicly on Twitter and privately (ish) on Facebook, but have neglected so far to post about it here. This is the summary I wrote up on my college's unofficial/underground private Facebook group, to try to get a take on what people wholly disconnected from the situation would think about it

Comments

[kihou]

That seems rather bullshit. No one at Intercon is going to be able to be neutral in all cases, because everyone will at least have friends they might be biased towards, and I feel like it's pretty rare for an experienced Intercon attendee to have no conflict with anyone. And it's bullshit to be punishing you for something someone else did to you, when you've acknowledged the potential conflict of interest and been willing to recuse yourself if necessary.

[etherial]

I feel that this is discrimination. The con chair disagrees, refuses to consider my point, and is behaving as if he cannot hear the words coming out of his own mouth (well, fingers).

What do you all think?

Convention Harassment Policies seem to follow the stages of grief. We've moved on from Denial, and are currently hitting Anger, where the Con attempts to do something but doesn't think it through, and at the first sign of failure, they double-down on their poorly thought out policy, which was usually arrived at without bothering to look at what Cons that are further along this process are have done.

I'm sorry you got caught up in this mess.

[hfcougar]

That's a surprisingly apt take on it. That does sound like how many communities in fandom and geekdom approach and process through the issue.

And actually, how the BoD handles some of its decisions as well.